I will try and review which ones I send, of course only the 40 compiled videos, (not direct uploads,) some taking approx 70 hrs to create, but I suspect there will be very few that I will feel are not worthy as each and every one were done with the intention of capturing the attention of those that were not previously aware of the discrepancies due to the media 'non' reporting.

I feel very positive about this, as noone can deny the information and comparison of their interviews and the subsequent forensic photos etc and discrepancies I have shown in each video. They certainly, imo, would not have officers dedicated to watching ALL the McCann interviews and pinpointing the discrepancies.

With the assurance that EVERYTHING submitted to the review is looked at, it feels good to know that many of our frustrations that I have highlighted in the videos, will, at the very least, be seen and that we really do have a voice (even if only through the videos)

I have no hesitation in saying that my impression, is that the detectives on the case take it very seriously and every piece of information is entered into Intelligence software.

When I asked about whether the discrepancies etc are looked at I was told "that is why its been given to a murder team".

HiDeHo...you are an absolute star and very special. I do hope "that is why its been given to a murder team" is something they really mean. What you have been doing is nothing short of fantastic and very very important

Congratulations to HiDeHo for her persistant good work. It is indeed good news that Scotland Yard will get to view your excellent videos. As far as "that is why its been given to a murder team" goes, I honestly can't believe that there is one law enforcement person in the U.K. or Portugal who does not believe that this is homicide case. Congratulations again, well done.

Well, 1.20am and I have finally sent the email (I have to be honest and admit to watching Sidney Poitier in To Sir With Love)

I doubt if I will be up at 4am to phone but I'll try a little later I'm hoping he will have time (or inspiration) to watch a couple of examples I added directly to the email....well it was hard to choose so I added 4

It has given many people a renewed sense of hope, knowing that Scotland Yard will see the videos. I hope they are received in the manner in which they were intended. I try to make them the 'voice' of those of us that are not 'heard' in the media.

I appreciate your time and thank you on behalf of the many forum members and bloggers for giving us renewed hope that the truth will be known and, hopefully one day Madeleine will be found and, if dead, she can finally be laid to rest with the dignity she deserves and her family can finally get some closure and be able to grieve.

I have had a few conversations with them (3 detectives and someone who answered the phone) and because of this I now have no question that they are dedicated to the review, looking at ALL possibilities. They take it seriously and spent time trying to answer my questions, but of course, had to be discreet.

They were not the detectives involved in 'Intelligence' but their job appears to be to look at the information sent and make decisions about its credibility and that of the 'informant'. I was told my previous information had been passed on to 'intelligence'.

I have spent more than an hour on the phone with them and never felt for one minute that they didn't have time to take my calls seriously and with patience. (thank goodness it is not on transcript..hopefully...as I think it would be comparable to some of T7 rogs when I was trying to ask questions I knew they couldn't answer!)

I have been in contact with Scotland Yard regarding some information given to me a year ago which I officially submitted a few weeks ago

Are you allowed to elaborate on what the information was that was given to you a year ago? To whom was it officially submitted a few weeks ago and how was it officially submitted?

Congratulations on a job well done from me by the way. I have no doubt that this review will be comprehensive as I know myself from past experience that such reviews take twists and turns along the way as new information emerges and I know that every bit of new information is analysed as part of the review process.

The purpose of my call, initially, was to ask if I could discuss the issue on forums or whether it should be left alone.

It is 'information' that may be nothing at all, on the other hand it could be extremely important, it depends on the date. I prefer not to say anything unless given the OK. It is 'heresay' which is why I have chosen not to discuss previously

I have been in contact with Scotland Yard regarding some information given to me a year ago which I officially submitted a few weeks ago

Are you allowed to elaborate on what the information was that was given to you a year ago? To whom was it officially submitted a few weeks ago and how was it officially submitted?

Congratulations on a job well done from me by the way. I have no doubt that this review will be comprehensive as I know myself from past experience that such reviews take twists and turns along the way as new information emerges and I know that every bit of new information is analysed as part of the review process.

Estelle wrote:HiDeHo said: "I have been in contact with Scotland Yard regarding some information given to me a year ago which I officially submitted a few weeks ago."

Are most members of forums already aware of this information? Or is it top secret? Is it about Oldfield?

You have done an excellent job with your videos, HiDeHo. Congratulations.

HiDeHo wrote:The purpose of my call, initially, was to ask if I could discuss the issue on forums or whether it should be left alone.

It is 'information' that may be nothing at all, on the other hand it could be extremely important, it depends on the date. I prefer not to say anything unless given the OK. It is 'heresay' which is why I have chosen not to discuss previously

I really hope you can get the OK to reveal what this information is. Are you trying to get the OK?

Keep it under your hat - SY are not the Courts, so Hearsay is a perfectly acceptable form of Intelligence that they can either discard or (hopefully) use to narrow the focus of aspects of the Review.

The contact is very credible and they would be easily able to confirm the info. It has been passed to 'intelligence' so, apparently, it has been considered credible

The important thing for me right now is to know that every discrepancy that I have highlighted in the videos is seen.

---Gerry's lie about using the front door/balcony door---Rachael claiming to have seen Madeleine for the last time at tennis on Thursday (Madeleine's group played on tuesday) and that she was playing tennis with Jane on Thursday lunch (at the time the last photo was taken and yet does not claim to have seen Madeleine at that time. The PJ questioned her as to which court she saw Madeleine playing on and whether Tiesday or thursday mini tennis she named the incorrect court (why did they ask her? Was it because they don't believe she was there?)---The three different crying episodesetc etc

HiDeHo, have you ever done a video about the Fund? This will be at the heart of this scam, applying to make Maddie Ward of Court the same day as the fund was launched (in record time). That it is not a charitable fund but a limited company which they do not tell the public, nor are they transparent about the accounts and hide behind it is a limited company. The fund accounts need a proper investigation and every item scruntinised. Are their directors like brian 'bulldozer' kennedy channeling money though it to save on income tax? The PI's they employed from the fund are in prison for fraud!!! They have spent the bulk of the donations into the fund for legals and suing people who try to purport the actual facts! Only 13% of the fund has been actually used for the 'search'. Most people do not realise that if Maddie was ever found that she could not go back to the mccanns as Maddie is a Ward of Court and is under the guardianship of the courts. They will decide where Maddie goes and what happens to her, not the mccanns. What parents would ever ever apply to give up their legal custody of their child a mere 12 days after they found her missing? She could be found at any time so why on earth give her up to the courts....Only ones who knew she would never be found and are pursuing the Fund as a financial income and gain using their daughters name would. The Fund is highly highly suspicious and needs a full in depth police investigation of it